(05-03-2016 12:45 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(05-01-2016 12:17 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  Last I checked we were in the business of trying to make money at these things.

Shouldn't we also be in the business of crowning a conference tournament champion at these things? It's bad enough that one team gets a home court advantage. Why give that team more advantages?

On the first day, fine. It shouldn't matter too much (although you have to think about quick turnaround for day 2. But past, that just play the schedule and if it's going to be set up for one team's advantage in any way, do that by seeding.

If we were a P5 league, sure, it would be that simple. But the reality is we have to do EVERY little thing to maximize revenue to avoid falling even further behind.

The equation is very simple:

Is having the host playing a day game doing everything you possibly can to maximize revenue? Answer is no. Therefore, this method should be scrapped immediately.

The host having the crowd advantage is also another tool the conference can use to generate attractive bids. You want your school to be the one with the advantage? Put up some $$$$.

(05-02-2016 04:12 PM)Nugget49er Wrote:  What has our "butts in the seats" attendance been for the last few years? I am not talking about tickets sold, because I think the title sponsor probably gets a wheelbarrow full of them that never get used. I am wondering what size arena we really need. I assume that the women's games would fit in a HS gym, but if you know that too it would be interesting.

Charlotte does not bid on these things for several reasons, but primarily because the CIAA tournament is here and they host about 100,000 fans. It is really incredible that a Div II tournament could be perhaps the largest basketball tournament in the nation, but it is. Our tournament would be a week or so later, but it may be difficult to use Time Warner Cable Arena because the Hornets will want to get back home for some games. Would it be possible to do the tournament in the 8600 seat Bojangles' Coliseum? Or on campus at the 9105 seat Halton Arena? Charlotte would be an excellent spot for our tournament, but getting casual fans to come would be very difficult here in the middle of ACC country with that tournament on TV at the same time.

As far as butts there were no where close to 7,000 at any game last year or the year before...up to the finials. We did not watch either finial game but I can grantee you there was no where close to that number last year...without seeing it. If I had to bet on it I would push that 7k down to 6,000 and that would be pushing it

The girls games could be held in a high school gym played in Charlotte. Depending on location 4,000 would max out the attendance and that's if muts and Western was playing 3 hours away. If it was in Nashville a girls tourney game between Western and MUTS would draw more than any mens game played in B'ham the last two years

(05-03-2016 12:45 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(05-01-2016 12:17 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  Last I checked we were in the business of trying to make money at these things.

Shouldn't we also be in the business of crowning a conference tournament champion at these things? It's bad enough that one team gets a home court advantage. Why give that team more advantages?

On the first day, fine. It shouldn't matter too much (although you have to think about quick turnaround for day 2. But past, that just play the schedule and if it's going to be set up for one team's advantage in any way, do that by seeding.

Did I go to sleep and wake up in a P5 league?

I didn't think so. Just go back to the way it was and stop your damn crying. Put up the cash for the tourney or STFU. That's as blunt as I can say it. When we can generate the revenue to host at a neutral site and teams bring more than a van load of fans we can talk about a neutral site. Until then sell tickets and show the F up to games.

(05-04-2016 06:57 AM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  

(05-03-2016 12:45 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(05-01-2016 12:17 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  Last I checked we were in the business of trying to make money at these things.

Shouldn't we also be in the business of crowning a conference tournament champion at these things? It's bad enough that one team gets a home court advantage. Why give that team more advantages?

On the first day, fine. It shouldn't matter too much (although you have to think about quick turnaround for day 2. But past, that just play the schedule and if it's going to be set up for one team's advantage in any way, do that by seeding.

Did I go to sleep and wake up in a P5 league?

I didn't think so. Just go back to the way it was and stop your damn crying. Put up the cash for the tourney or STFU. That's as blunt as I can say it. When we can generate the revenue to host at a neutral site and teams bring more than a van load of fans we can talk about a neutral site. Until then sell tickets and show the F up to games.

I believe that you are a little too blunt. My understanding (I may be wrong) is that a bidding city is required to have two college quality facilities in which to hold games (mens/womens). If you do not have those, it does not matter how much cash you put up, you will not get the tourney. I would guess that Ruston, Huntington, BG and others can not meet that criteria so may never host the tourney.

(05-04-2016 09:33 AM)Jacque Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 06:57 AM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  

(05-03-2016 12:45 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(05-01-2016 12:17 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  Last I checked we were in the business of trying to make money at these things.

Shouldn't we also be in the business of crowning a conference tournament champion at these things? It's bad enough that one team gets a home court advantage. Why give that team more advantages?

On the first day, fine. It shouldn't matter too much (although you have to think about quick turnaround for day 2. But past, that just play the schedule and if it's going to be set up for one team's advantage in any way, do that by seeding.

Did I go to sleep and wake up in a P5 league?

I didn't think so. Just go back to the way it was and stop your damn crying. Put up the cash for the tourney or STFU. That's as blunt as I can say it. When we can generate the revenue to host at a neutral site and teams bring more than a van load of fans we can talk about a neutral site. Until then sell tickets and show the F up to games.

I believe that you are a little too blunt. My understanding (I may be wrong) is that a bidding city is required to have two college quality facilities in which to hold games (mens/womens). If you do not have those, it does not matter how much cash you put up, you will not get the tourney. I would guess that Ruston, Huntington, BG and others can not meet that criteria so may never host the tourney.

Pretty sure that Ruston can due to Shreveport being nearby.

(05-04-2016 09:52 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 09:33 AM)Jacque Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 06:57 AM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  

(05-03-2016 12:45 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(05-01-2016 12:17 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  Last I checked we were in the business of trying to make money at these things.

Shouldn't we also be in the business of crowning a conference tournament champion at these things? It's bad enough that one team gets a home court advantage. Why give that team more advantages?

On the first day, fine. It shouldn't matter too much (although you have to think about quick turnaround for day 2. But past, that just play the schedule and if it's going to be set up for one team's advantage in any way, do that by seeding.

Did I go to sleep and wake up in a P5 league?

I didn't think so. Just go back to the way it was and stop your damn crying. Put up the cash for the tourney or STFU. That's as blunt as I can say it. When we can generate the revenue to host at a neutral site and teams bring more than a van load of fans we can talk about a neutral site. Until then sell tickets and show the F up to games.

I believe that you are a little too blunt. My understanding (I may be wrong) is that a bidding city is required to have two college quality facilities in which to hold games (mens/womens). If you do not have those, it does not matter how much cash you put up, you will not get the tourney. I would guess that Ruston, Huntington, BG and others can not meet that criteria so may never host the tourney.

Pretty sure that Ruston can due to Shreveport being nearby.

If that's the case BG could host because Owensboro is just as close as Shreveport to Ruston...

70 miles

never work because CUSA splits the fanbase when they schedule both programs at the same time

(05-04-2016 10:03 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 09:52 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 09:33 AM)Jacque Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 06:57 AM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  

(05-03-2016 12:45 PM)inutech Wrote:  Shouldn't we also be in the business of crowning a conference tournament champion at these things? It's bad enough that one team gets a home court advantage. Why give that team more advantages?

On the first day, fine. It shouldn't matter too much (although you have to think about quick turnaround for day 2. But past, that just play the schedule and if it's going to be set up for one team's advantage in any way, do that by seeding.

Did I go to sleep and wake up in a P5 league?

I didn't think so. Just go back to the way it was and stop your damn crying. Put up the cash for the tourney or STFU. That's as blunt as I can say it. When we can generate the revenue to host at a neutral site and teams bring more than a van load of fans we can talk about a neutral site. Until then sell tickets and show the F up to games.

I believe that you are a little too blunt. My understanding (I may be wrong) is that a bidding city is required to have two college quality facilities in which to hold games (mens/womens). If you do not have those, it does not matter how much cash you put up, you will not get the tourney. I would guess that Ruston, Huntington, BG and others can not meet that criteria so may never host the tourney.

Pretty sure that Ruston can due to Shreveport being nearby.

If that's the case BG could host because Owensboro is just as close as Shreveport to Ruston...

70 miles

never work because CUSA splits the fanbase when they schedule both programs at the same time

I meant that Shreveport/Bossier City would be the host site, not both Ruston and Shreveport.

I get the desire for fairness with hosts, but let's get real. The people complaining about the host playing at night are the ones who haven't hosted. When it's your home court and you're playing at noon on a Thursday and your fans can't go, you would understand the frustration. Heck, as a fan of a team who hasn't hosted a basketball tournament in my lifetime, I think that'd be ridiculous. If you're putting the money down to host, you should have the opportunity to actually make money.

(05-04-2016 10:24 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 10:03 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 09:52 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 09:33 AM)Jacque Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 06:57 AM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  Did I go to sleep and wake up in a P5 league?

I didn't think so. Just go back to the way it was and stop your damn crying. Put up the cash for the tourney or STFU. That's as blunt as I can say it. When we can generate the revenue to host at a neutral site and teams bring more than a van load of fans we can talk about a neutral site. Until then sell tickets and show the F up to games.

I believe that you are a little too blunt. My understanding (I may be wrong) is that a bidding city is required to have two college quality facilities in which to hold games (mens/womens). If you do not have those, it does not matter how much cash you put up, you will not get the tourney. I would guess that Ruston, Huntington, BG and others can not meet that criteria so may never host the tourney.

Pretty sure that Ruston can due to Shreveport being nearby.

If that's the case BG could host because Owensboro is just as close as Shreveport to Ruston...

70 miles

never work because CUSA splits the fanbase when they schedule both programs at the same time

I meant that Shreveport/Bossier City would be the host site, not both Ruston and Shreveport.

My understanding is the conference didn't like the secondary facility Shreveport/Bossier offered...so as long as they don't like it and they have the two facility requirement Shreveport/Bossier won't be bidding.

(05-04-2016 10:35 AM)EagNBran Wrote:  I get the desire for fairness with hosts, but let's get real. The people complaining about the host playing at night are the ones who haven't hosted. When it's your home court and you're playing at noon on a Thursday and your fans can't go, you would understand the frustration. Heck, as a fan of a team who hasn't hosted a basketball tournament in my lifetime, I think that'd be ridiculous. If you're putting the money down to host, you should have the opportunity to actually make money.

I concur. Give the host team the prime time (evening) spots, then give the top seeds the biggest rest time. Hell, UAB was the top seed and the host this past year and they couldn't play when they wanted.

This isn't about UAB. What if USM were the host in Biloxi and had to play games at noon, one, or two. That would suck for the entire conference. As a UAB fan I would not mind having the least amount of time between games if I put coin in my pocket. After all you better have your ass ready for quick turn around in tournaments. I would love for USM or MTSU to get it. I would hate it for them if most of the fans can't go when we have a league that simply won't support this thing as a whole. We all need to step it up including UAB. Especially UAB.

I predict UTEP gets it next and they get it. I hope they get all the prime time games.

(05-04-2016 09:37 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  This isn't about UAB. What if USM were the host in Biloxi and had to play games at noon, one, or two. That would suck for the entire conference. As a UAB fan I would not mind having the least amount of time between games if I put coin in my pocket. After all you better have your ass ready for quick turn around in tournaments. I would love for USM or MTSU to get it. I would hate it for them if most of the fans can't go when we have a league that simply won't support this thing as a whole. We all need to step it up including UAB. Especially UAB.

I predict UTEP gets it next and they get it. I hope they get all the prime time games.

That's exactly what I was saying. Sorry if it didn't come off that way.

I haven't heard anything from UTEP or the city government about bidding for the basketball tournament again. This is a little bit of speculation but if UTEP doesn't put in a bid, like virtually every other year, then there is some truth to the rumor of UTEP leaving for the MWC.

(05-04-2016 09:33 AM)Jacque Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 06:57 AM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  

(05-03-2016 12:45 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(05-01-2016 12:17 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  Last I checked we were in the business of trying to make money at these things.

Shouldn't we also be in the business of crowning a conference tournament champion at these things? It's bad enough that one team gets a home court advantage. Why give that team more advantages?

On the first day, fine. It shouldn't matter too much (although you have to think about quick turnaround for day 2. But past, that just play the schedule and if it's going to be set up for one team's advantage in any way, do that by seeding.

Did I go to sleep and wake up in a P5 league?

I didn't think so. Just go back to the way it was and stop your damn crying. Put up the cash for the tourney or STFU. That's as blunt as I can say it. When we can generate the revenue to host at a neutral site and teams bring more than a van load of fans we can talk about a neutral site. Until then sell tickets and show the F up to games.

I believe that you are a little too blunt. My understanding (I may be wrong) is that a bidding city is required to have two college quality facilities in which to hold games (mens/womens). If you do not have those, it does not matter how much cash you put up, you will not get the tourney. I would guess that Ruston, Huntington, BG and others can not meet that criteria so may never host the tourney.

Huntington has two college quality facilities that are about 12 blocks apart. That wouldn't be a problem here.

(05-04-2016 06:57 AM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  

(05-03-2016 12:45 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(05-01-2016 12:17 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  Last I checked we were in the business of trying to make money at these things.

Shouldn't we also be in the business of crowning a conference tournament champion at these things? It's bad enough that one team gets a home court advantage. Why give that team more advantages?

On the first day, fine. It shouldn't matter too much (although you have to think about quick turnaround for day 2. But past, that just play the schedule and if it's going to be set up for one team's advantage in any way, do that by seeding.

Did I go to sleep and wake up in a P5 league?

I didn't think so. Just go back to the way it was and stop your damn crying. Put up the cash for the tourney or STFU. That's as blunt as I can say it. When we can generate the revenue to host at a neutral site and teams bring more than a van load of fans we can talk about a neutral site. Until then sell tickets and show the F up to games.

Wait a minute. Who is the one crying here?

(05-03-2016 11:32 PM)hooverblazer Wrote:  

(05-03-2016 12:45 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(05-01-2016 12:17 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  Last I checked we were in the business of trying to make money at these things.

Shouldn't we also be in the business of crowning a conference tournament champion at these things? It's bad enough that one team gets a home court advantage. Why give that team more advantages?

On the first day, fine. It shouldn't matter too much (although you have to think about quick turnaround for day 2. But past, that just play the schedule and if it's going to be set up for one team's advantage in any way, do that by seeding.

If we were a P5 league, sure, it would be that simple. But the reality is we have to do EVERY little thing to maximize revenue to avoid falling even further behind.

The equation is very simple:

Is having the host playing a day game doing everything you possibly can to maximize revenue? Answer is no. Therefore, this method should be scrapped immediately.

The host having the crowd advantage is also another tool the conference can use to generate attractive bids. You want your school to be the one with the advantage? Put up some $$$$.

I don't think you should be able to buy an advantage for your basketball team. That defeats the whole point of what we're trying to do (crown a champion). Without neutral sites, we're already giving up some advantage. Why go further than that?

(05-05-2016 04:03 AM)ThunderingHerdFan Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 09:33 AM)Jacque Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 06:57 AM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  

(05-03-2016 12:45 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(05-01-2016 12:17 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  Last I checked we were in the business of trying to make money at these things.

Shouldn't we also be in the business of crowning a conference tournament champion at these things? It's bad enough that one team gets a home court advantage. Why give that team more advantages?

On the first day, fine. It shouldn't matter too much (although you have to think about quick turnaround for day 2. But past, that just play the schedule and if it's going to be set up for one team's advantage in any way, do that by seeding.

Did I go to sleep and wake up in a P5 league?

I didn't think so. Just go back to the way it was and stop your damn crying. Put up the cash for the tourney or STFU. That's as blunt as I can say it. When we can generate the revenue to host at a neutral site and teams bring more than a van load of fans we can talk about a neutral site. Until then sell tickets and show the F up to games.

I believe that you are a little too blunt. My understanding (I may be wrong) is that a bidding city is required to have two college quality facilities in which to hold games (mens/womens). If you do not have those, it does not matter how much cash you put up, you will not get the tourney. I would guess that Ruston, Huntington, BG and others can not meet that criteria so may never host the tourney.

Huntington has two college quality facilities that are about 12 blocks apart. That wouldn't be a problem here.

Thanks for the info as I did not know that. I have never been to Huntington but plan to come this football season. Maybe MU can put in a bid for the tourney as that would be a short drive from BG.

(05-05-2016 09:18 AM)Jacque Wrote:  

(05-05-2016 04:03 AM)ThunderingHerdFan Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 09:33 AM)Jacque Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 06:57 AM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  

(05-03-2016 12:45 PM)inutech Wrote:  Shouldn't we also be in the business of crowning a conference tournament champion at these things? It's bad enough that one team gets a home court advantage. Why give that team more advantages?

On the first day, fine. It shouldn't matter too much (although you have to think about quick turnaround for day 2. But past, that just play the schedule and if it's going to be set up for one team's advantage in any way, do that by seeding.

Did I go to sleep and wake up in a P5 league?

I didn't think so. Just go back to the way it was and stop your damn crying. Put up the cash for the tourney or STFU. That's as blunt as I can say it. When we can generate the revenue to host at a neutral site and teams bring more than a van load of fans we can talk about a neutral site. Until then sell tickets and show the F up to games.

I believe that you are a little too blunt. My understanding (I may be wrong) is that a bidding city is required to have two college quality facilities in which to hold games (mens/womens). If you do not have those, it does not matter how much cash you put up, you will not get the tourney. I would guess that Ruston, Huntington, BG and others can not meet that criteria so may never host the tourney.

Huntington has two college quality facilities that are about 12 blocks apart. That wouldn't be a problem here.

Thanks for the info as I did not know that. I have never been to Huntington but plan to come this football season. Maybe MU can put in a bid for the tourney as that would be a short drive from BG.

Huntington just lacks the money to bid on the tournament. The street to my home has been closed for nearly a year. The city now says that have no imminent plans to ever re-open.

(05-05-2016 09:02 AM)inutech Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 06:57 AM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  

(05-03-2016 12:45 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(05-01-2016 12:17 PM)ATTALLABLAZE Wrote:  Last I checked we were in the business of trying to make money at these things.

Shouldn't we also be in the business of crowning a conference tournament champion at these things? It's bad enough that one team gets a home court advantage. Why give that team more advantages?

On the first day, fine. It shouldn't matter too much (although you have to think about quick turnaround for day 2. But past, that just play the schedule and if it's going to be set up for one team's advantage in any way, do that by seeding.

Did I go to sleep and wake up in a P5 league?

I didn't think so. Just go back to the way it was and stop your damn crying. Put up the cash for the tourney or STFU. That's as blunt as I can say it. When we can generate the revenue to host at a neutral site and teams bring more than a van load of fans we can talk about a neutral site. Until then sell tickets and show the F up to games.

Wait a minute. Who is the one crying here?

Well I wasn't going to call anyone out until you said that but a certain fan base that cried like newborn infants until they convinced the conference to alter it from the way it has always been. Remember that IF you ever are allowed to host it and are stuck with crappy start times and your fan base cannot attend and the league is looking at you about lousy attendance at the tournament. Yea you are sore about getting beat. Well it didn't help you the week before when we clocked your ass by 20 with three days rest. I chuckle to think how your whining would go over if Memphis was still here and you had to go to FEF. you would be laughed out of the league. shut up, man up and put butts in the seats. Stop being a running joke with the rest of the league and media with your whining.

I was done until you popped off again.......

If I pissed you off, good. put me on ignore.

Host should get first pick of their start times. #1 seed picks next. Then #2, etc.